Talk:Puddling furnace

Puddling v. pudding

"puddling seems to be more common on the Google poll, and is the form used in the OED. See User talk:Noisy for details. Shimmin 23:21, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

Comment

I have removed the desription of other processes. These do not belong here. Any one wanting to konw about them should follow the link. I am not sure to what extent puddled iron may have been the raw material for cementation process (for blister steel) and then for the production of crucible steel in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It was almost certainly not before 1850, when the main raw material was imported Swedish (and sometimes Russian) iron. The ability to produce good steel depends on the iron being particularly free of phospherus, which iron from English ores is not. Peterkingiron 22:07, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

There is a separate page for 'puddling', which probably ought to be abolished, being merged with this one. Peterkingiron 22:17, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I have now greatly expanded the article, adding a historical section and references. In doing so, I have deleted the following text as mistaken or misleading:

• The puddling furnace was also used as the first step in making crucible steel as well (see cementation process).
• It is the process of manually handling and stirring the iron during and after this process that gives us the name "wrought". Invented by Peter Onions and patented by Henry Cort in 1783–4, the puddling process, along with the blast furnace, led to a massive increase in the amount of iron being produced every year.

Peterkingiron 16:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Merge Proposal with puddling (metallurgy)

Support. At present there are a lot of articles on different aspects of historical iron production. These need to be sorted out so that there is one main article gving an overview of the whole process with links (using the 'main' template to separate ones for each process and its associated plant. I have probably the expertise for this, but not necessarily the time. Other articles to which this applies include blast furnace, and steel. In some cases because the subject this not tightly enough defined, peripheral subjects have been brought in. Over past months, I have removed a number of errors and incongruities, but the whole subject needs a thorough tidy up. Peterkingiron 16:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Everything in the furnace article is describing the process and the text should be moved there. Obviously the furnace is not a technology by itself, it's a structure. -- Goldie (tell me) 13:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

As far as I am concerned you are welcome to go ahead and do this. I think there are puddling sections in other iron-related or steel-related articles. These need to be trimmed down with a cross-references placed at the head of the section - see main article: ther is a template for doing this called 'main'. Unfortunately I do not have the time to tackle this, as sorting out the iron and steel articles will be a major undertaking. Peterkingiron 16:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)